Unusual thinking in recent times

I have never had much of an opinion on politics or current events. I just accepted what was reported on the news and never really considered the
legitimacy of what has been reported. Recently however, since September 11, I have started to notice that I have differing opinions to the mainstream
on a number of news events that have happened. I felt the need to list some of them here and promote discussion with other like minded people. Below
is a list of some of the events I am referring to:

1. The events following the September 11 attacks.
2. The way the Bali Bombings. Madrid bombings and London Bombings were reported.
3. The Howard Governments unconditional support for the Bush government.
4. The Schappelle Corby v Michelle Leslie decision.
5. The Van Nguyen execution.

1. The events following the September 11 attacks.

I found it odd that the US were so quick to ascertain that Osama Bin Laden was behind these attacks and Afghanastan should be the target of a
retaliation strike. When news reports came out about this conclusion there seemed to be little effort to make the distinction between terrorists and
the Muslim community. My first feelings on this were that I feared for the safety of Muslims everywhere as this was giving anyone who felt so
inclined an excuse to target them despite no justification.

Once the attack on Afghanastan began I thought it odd that the focus quickly turned on Saddam Hussein and WMD's. They seemed to have no link but
there was no news reports highlighting this nor was the any discussion over the fact that Osama Bin Laden so quickly became was forgotten about
despite still not being captured.

I believed that Irag most likely did have WMD's as a lot of countries do, but still saw no reason to justify an attack on Iraq over it. I never even
considered that Iraq may not even have them, yet still the War went ahead and still 4 years on troops still occupy the country. Bizarre!

In all this time however, until only a few weeks ago when someone mentioned it to me and now after noticing many of the threads on the subject, I
never considered that the actual September 11 attacks were surrounded by conspiracy also. It now seems that a conspiracy is a very likely
scenario.

2. The way the Bali Bombings. Madrid bombings and London Bombings were reported.

I found it annoying that the Bali Bombings and to a lesser extent the London bombings have been compared, in Australia at least, to the September 11
attacks as if they are on the same scale. I also found it frustrating that Australia considers the Bali bombings primarily as an attack on them
despite the fact that it occurred in another country and the majority of people killed were not Australians. Why was there virtually no mention of
the Madrid bombings in Australia? There just seems to be so much inconsistency with what is reported, how it's portrayed and what is ignored.

3. The Howard Governments unconditional support for the Bush government.

Despite the fact that there seems to be no justification for the War in Iraq the Howard government has backed the US every step of the way, with very
little opposition in Australia over ths stance. Nobody seems to be too worried about the anti-terrorism laws that Howard has passed which take away
the rights of the people and give the government an excuse to target anyone they want without legitmate cause. Little effort has been made to bring
David Hicks back to Australia despite being held in the US for years without being charged (until recently?). Recently the Howard government carried
out raids on homes in Sydney and Melbourne arresting 17 people for conspiracy to commit a terrorist attack, but there was no focus on how much
evidence they had to justify the raids. Even the Opposition Party doesn't seem to draw attention to the fact that nobody has bothered trying to
understand why the terrorists are commiting these acts around the world, and trying to work on a peaceful resolution rather than just accepting that
these acts are going to continue. Why doesn't the government try and reason with the terrorist groups to work out what it is that is upsetting them
so much? Why does the government assume that they are 100% free of blame?

Probably the most disturbing part about all this is that nobody seems to recognise that the overwhelming reason why Australia has now become a target
on the Terrorism radar is Howard is persisting in supporting Bush in the War in Iraq despite absolutely no justification, yet there is no uproar!
Howard seems to be disillusioned into believing the Australia is some sort of superpower and is making decisions based on this, when in reality
Australia has practically no military power at all. Had Howard not relentlessly persisted with his unconditional support for the Bush government,
Australia would never have been a terrorist target in a million years.

4. The Schappelle Corby v Michelle Leslie decision.

Personally I believe that Schappelle has been unjustly imprisoned and has done nothing wrong. Michelle Leslie on the other hand was definitely guilty
in my opinion however I still feel that her penalty was severe considering she was carrying only two ecstacy tablets. However I understand that
Indonesia has harsh penalties on drugs and everyone should be aware of that by now. I can't help but feel however that the biggest obstacle
Schappelle Corby faced in obtaining a lighter sentence was the fact the she wasn't guilty! It seemed that the prosecutors had her pegged as being
guilty until proven innocent and would have been much more leniant had she confessed. Michelle Leslie had the benefit of being guilty thus confessing
was a viable option and it certainly worked wonders for her. What a strange world we live in when you are better off commitiing a crime than being
innocent!

5. The Van Nguyen execution.

In Australia recently, there was much uproar over the fact that an Australian man, Van Nguyen, was being executed in Singapore for Drug Trafficking.
He was found guilty of trafficking a large quantity of heroin and openly admitted that he committed the crime. Now he seemed like a nice guy, but he
knew that Singapore had harsh penalties for drug trafficking and there was no doubt that he was guilty. Why then, was there such a fuss made over his
execution? Many have been executed before him for lesser crimes including Australians and I can't recall this level of opposition being expressed in
those instances. I can't help but feel that the Howard government had an alterior motive behind all this.

I know many of you may not even see why I thought this post was worth documenting but knowing the way I am, and the fact that I rarely form any
opinion on politics or current events, it seems odd to me that even I am able to see the incosistency in how these events have been reported.

Michael Jackson is another one I never thought of last time. I know most people think the trial was rigged and he should have been found guilty, but
although I agree the integrity of the trial was definitely compromised, I believe the right decision was made. I think the conspiracy here is that he
was accused of these crimes unjustly. He may be a lot of things, a very odd person to say the least, but he's love of children (in a non-sexual way)
is completely genuine in my opinion, and the last thing he would ever do is sexually abuse them.

I know the news networks are often (if not always) driven by audience ratings. But the amount of time given to the Jackson trial was the thing that
irritates me. Does anyone ever wonder if Celeb News is often used to distract the public from Global-national news?
Certainly most people who own the media often have political agenda's. Rupert Murdoch who's company owns the Times, Sun, News of the World and Star
newspapers in England alone supported the war in Iraq (they also own Fox News, Sky News and over 200 sky channels and many other newspapers around the
world).

Live Aid was the best. Here we had Bob Guildoff (a man with a company worth over £300 million) bring the nations attention to Africa at a time when
we had just had the Hutton report which had cleared the U.K government of "sexing up the intelligence" in the run up to the war in Iraq.
Iraq was going badly and with no WMD's to be found the public was beginning to wonder just how good these public enquires are. Once more the same
sort of people who care about Iraqis may also care about Africans.
Cynical? Bob Guildof actually said "Tony Blair has done more to help Africa than any other leader" in front of a bunch of young people on a special
MTV interview. This is in spite of the fact that arms is one of the U.K's biggest national exports and has been for decades. Once more many of these
weapons go to third world dictatorships (including African ones).

Bob Guilof and Live Aid reminds me of the sort the false opposition seen in George Orwell’s 1984. And I’m sure Claire Short is the MP equivalent.

I never really thought of the Bob Geldof agenda, that's an interesting idea. I suppose you can look at any report and see unusual elements
indicating alternate agendas. After all, the majority of what we think we know from the news could all be cover stories, since we only ever here one
point of view and all of the information is controlled by the same source. Scary thought.

There may be nothing to this, but I've never noticed in the past the mention of so many cyclones in Australia on the news. It seems there has been 4
or 5 in the last few weeks. Similar to the US last year, it might be that there are always this many but they just don't normally receive so much
attention. It smells fishy to me.

Throw Bono of U2 into that Geldof 'Illusion of Compassion'. Basically anyone who has been Knighted is a fraud. For all the money raised from UNICEF
and the litany of causes and sources for relief in Africa, it should look like Santa Barbara by now! Genocide helps the NWO's cause and makes them
mega dollars from compassionate fools like us.

Perhaps it's a result of overdosing on ATS that this stands out to me, but the cyclone frequency creates a convenient distraction to draw attention
away from the current turmoil the current government finds themselves in. It couldn't have come at a better time for them.

"Under the relentless thrust of accelerating over-population and increasing over-organization, and by means of ever more effective methods of
mind-manipulation, the democracies will change their nature; and quaint old forms -- elections, parliaments, Supreme Courts and all the rest -- will
remain. The underlying substance will be a new kind of non-violent totalitarianism. All the traditional names, all the hallowed slogans will remain
exactly what they were in the good old days. Democracy and freedom will be the theme of every broadcast and editorial -- but democracy and freedom in
a strictly Pickwickian sense. Meanwhile the ruling oligarchy and its highly trained elite of soldiers, policemen, thought-manufacturers and
mind-manipulators will quietly run the show as they see fit."
Aldous Huxley

Huxley was less of a prophet and more of an early mind manipulator himself. He was an orchestrator of so many of the bad things this country {US} now
suffers from.

Originally posted by mytym
Perhaps it's a result of overdosing on ATS that this stands out to me, but the cyclone frequency creates a convenient distraction to draw attention
away from the current turmoil the current government finds themselves in. It couldn't have come at a better time for them.

You can see the same thing with the Watergate scandal; the whole affair drowned out exposures of COINTELPRO.

Perhaps I'm getting a little off topic here, but here's some thinking of mine that appears to be unusual in contrast to what I have been presented
with.

When there is an accident, such as a driver of a car killing a pedestrian I only seem to notice the expression of concern for the victim. I
personally feel just as strongly, if not more so for the driver. He/She has to live with this for the rest of his/her life, despite the likelyhood
that it was an unavoidable accident. Does anyone else share this feeling?

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.